The assurance of ones justified
standing with God serves as the basis of ones confident walk in the essence
of those who are members of the Body of Christ. The most blessed of Godís people
are those who first understand the eternal benefits ofsalvation
and as of a result, have internalized this truth and translated it into the
practical aspect of daily walking in Him, as we move toward eternity. To many of
Godís people, it is very difficult to transition the written or spoken word of
God into the living manifestation of it in our daily lives. We must fully
comprehend the fact that our true status in life begins with our eternalrelationship with God. In essence our peace in this life is directly
linked and dominated by our peace with God (Romans 5:1). Our peace with
God is culminated from our eternal peace from God (Romans 1:7). Thus the
enactment of justification engenders the peace of God (Philippians 4:7;
Colossians 3:15), who is the God of peace (Romans 15:33; Philippians 4:9;
16:20; I Thessalonians 5:23). Justification denotes peace and acceptance with
God.

In Romans 15:13 it reads (KJV), "Now
the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound
in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost". Now from the Greek text, "And may
the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace while believing, unto the end
that you may abound in the hope in the power of the Holy Spirit". "Hope or
earnest expectation" is not the illusive entity that some deem it to be. Hope
is actually the derivative of justification. It depends upon justification;
it is in proportion to justification. But many of Godís people have very little
if any understanding of what justification is, accordingly, they find themselves
in no position to either affirm or deny anything concerning it. Thus it is
encumbered upon the ministry to carefully define and explain the doctrine of
"justification", endeavoring to show both what it signifies, as well as
what it does not connote.

The meaning of the term justify does
not mean to make inherently righteous and holy but it signifies
only to formally pronounce just or legally declare one to be righteous.
Justification is our acceptance by which God receives His elect into His favor
and esteems us as righteous persons. It consists of the eradication of our sins
and the imputation of the righteous of Christ to ouraccount. Thus
we are not righteous in ourselves but we are consideredrighteous in
Christ.

There was a relatively brief period in
the 16th century during the so called "reformation era" when the
blesseth truth of justification was one of the best known doctrines of the
Protestrian Christian Faith, when it was regularly expounded through preaching
and teaching by the clergy of that day. At that period in church history, the
rank and file of those influenced by Martin Lutherís prioritizing of the
epistles written by the Apostle Paul was constantly exposed to the principle
aspects of salvation by grace alone.

Justification by faith, in light of the
sovereign grace of God through election, was at the very nucleus of this
doctrinal teaching. Its origin was derived through the prioritizing and
distinguishing of the epistles of Paul, as having supreme value contents
over the law and other Old Testament doctrinal instructions. Oddly, the
proponents of these two doctrinal persuasions (election by sovereign
grace and division of the bible according to dispensations) are at opposite
ends of the spectrum.

The underlying culprit of this rift
between these groups can be traced to the doctrine of synergism, which
teaches manís partnership or cooperation with God and ultimate influence upon
the enactment of his will. Subsequent to the emergence of synergism and the
corresponding diluting of the doctrine of election and ultimate diversion of the
true principle of grace; generations have drifted from the actual
factuality to this present point wherein the vast majority of

Reformation and Evangelical Christendom
are mostly ignorant of this precious theme. In this present day and time, with
rare exceptions, it is no longer given aprominent place in the
pulpits of ministries. Indeed any writings on it are scarce in this era of
menís synergistically contrivance of propagating their conception of "how to",
i.e., "the proper method for receiving the things that one desires from God".

Consequently, comparatively few of
Godís elect understand what justification actually connotes and still
even less are clear as to the grounds on which God justifiesthe
ungodly. Unfortunately as we view the spiritual welfare of Godís people,
this places genuine grace ministers out of the accepted mainstream of
ministering. Those who hew strictly to the meat of the message, i.e., the
spiritual invisible everlasting association of the elect linked to their eternal
relationship with God in eternity; will automatically shun the more
physicallyattractive yet superficial treatment of Godís directives
to The Body of Christ. Thus such faithful ones will find themselves resoundingly
in the minority.

In spite of this, God is to be praised
as he continues to call and equip faithful ministers to dedicatedly declare
and vindicate the truth unto the instruction and edification of those whom He
has caused to love it in sincerity. The extent of the scope of genuine
ministry is to extricate the minds of Godís people from the difficulties of
secular peculiarities, which so many have endeavored to cast on all Gospel
ministries. The true crux of feeding the flock of God must be to direct the
consciences of those who sincerely inquire after abiding peace with God, and to
establish the minds of those who believe thethings that are actually
directed to the Church in this dispensation.

This, in spite of its unpopularity,
must be the aim of informed ministering inthis age of Grace; that
is, to present the doctrines of salvation i.e., Justification, etc., as the
vital subjects that they are. This requires going into them deeply and
entering into great details, even every revealed aspect of these truths.
This we must do even through it may seem to cause a heavy taxation upon the
spiritual mentality and patience of the average child of God. But the truly
called one of God is mandated to teach and preach accordingly. Thus we
respectfully urge all of Godís people (and those in Grace ministries in
particular) to make a concerted effort to gird up the lions of our minds and
seek to prayerfully master the foundational doctrines of salvation.

In examining the subject of
justification, as we outlay the exegesis of what the word of God conveys, we
will present the facts of the doctrinal side of the truth as we correlate it
judicially. This is distinguished from the practical or experimental side. Yet
when taken in light of the full knowledge of Godsí grace working for and in
sinful mankind, it becomes apparent that the doctrine of Justification is not
by any means to be viewed as impractical, no, indeed far from it.

The judicious act of God declaring His
elect justified, in practice entails the external enactment of the account of
the righteousness of Jesus Christ, to be conferred, deposited or credited to the
worth or standing of the believer before Him. This does not take into
account the personal worth or contributable input of the conferee, but it only
weighs the enumeration of the assessment as a transaction of imputation.
Thus justification before God cannotbe viewed in both the legal
and evangelical sense. The distinct nature of the two viewed in partnership
(legal and evangelical) form a phantasm or mirage; as the former gives credit
to and singularly glorifies God, while the latter is derogatory to the merit
of Christ if it ascribes even partial credit to the recipient, rather
than total credit to the blood of Christ.

Consequently true or scriptural
justification gives no countenance to any amalgamation (blending or mixing) of
the actual and practicing aspects of righteousness, holiness or sanctification.
All justification that could be merited is over thrown by this distinction. This
dissimilarity is marked by; on the one hand, the actuality or factuality of
justification based on faith alone and on the other hand the visible
manifestation of the functions of those who are justified. It must be clearly
understood that the former is the essence of our acceptable standing before Him
and is sufficient within itself. Thus while the latter is a noble testimony to
the accomplishment of Godís work of imputing righteousness to His elect; it,
in itself is not a continuation of the act of justification. It depends on
faith alone, not on ones so-called "personal righteousness", which is not
acquirable in ones daily walk. In other words, is justification a once completed
judicious act in all itís cause and effect of it or does the commanding power of
the Law constitute an obligation of obedience to effectuate a continuation or
sustenance of it? Does the continuation of the actual pardon and justified
estate depend upon the performance of its recipient?

The scriptural principles of
justification teach that nothing is required here unto but the
application of righteousness imputed. This alone is the pleadable basis of
the continuation of our approved standing before God. Thus ones personal
obedience does not constitute Godís pleasure in His acceptance of us, even
though God is definitely pleased with the exemplification of righteous
deeds on the part of the one to whom righteous has been reckoned. Consequently
in essence, acceptability to God is that which is externally conferred, not
that which externally manifested.

The perpetrators of arminianism as well
as those who are synergistically inspired do in fact both foist and affirm
various forms of so-called "evangelical personalrighteousness."
The very nature and usage of such terminology engenders in many respects
(whether intended or not), a connotation of angelical justification on
their evangelical righteousness. It is indeed puzzling how this is by some
affirmed and even applauded. How is it possible, in light of Paulís writings
(our gospel in the Dispensation of Grace), that evangelical personal
righteousness could be asserted as a condition of our righteousness, or the
pardon of sin? There is no personal righteousness required in the Gospel of
Grace; otherwise grace would not be grace (unmerited favor). Contrariwise,
the nature of the Law induces a requirement for inherent and habitual
righteousness, sanctification and holiness. In this sense righteousness (the
standard of God) is required from a source from whence there is no such
substance. This is the reason why all must accept the verdict that all the
progenyof Adam are depraved creatures, thus the requirement of
denominated righteousness by the believer is a loss cause. Evangelical personal
righteousness should never be asserted as the condition of our righteousness nor
could there ever be any evangelical justification attached to our personal
expressions of Godís righteousness.

Those who espouse the teachings of the
contents of the Epistle of James (justification by faith and works) have
a lack of comprehension that they are doctrinally and dispensationally out of
synch with the epistles of Paul, which teaches justification by faith alone.
There is a vast difference between the terms and non-conditions of the
GraceCovenant (Grace Mystery Gospel) verses, the terms and
conditions outlaid in the New Covenant(Kingdom Gospel),
though justification in both gospels is antecedently originated in the merit of
Jesus Christ alone. Even in James teachings there is no assertion there one
may be justified by their inherent personal righteous. A clear understanding
of the doctrine of the New Covenant plainly teaches that the
accomplishment of justification is invested in the fact that the deeds of the
Law originally written on tablets of stone in the Old Covenant; is now
(and will be) written in their hearts through identification with the workings
of Christ in the spirit of God, which shall dwell in them. Thus, it will not be
them (nor could it ever be) but the spirit of God in them implementing
the deeds of the law unto justification. For those who are under theGrace Covenantthere are no stipulations of works whatsoever; there
is only the transference of righteousness,
sanctification and holiness by the imputation of the merit of Christ, which is
unmerited by the elect of God.

Now one must be very careful not to
construe this distinction between FaithRighteousness (which is by
imputation), and so-called Evangelical PersonRighteousness,
(which is viewed as the character of the believer), to be antithetical to the
appeal for moral conduct in the believer. Conversely, it is an unbiased
knowledge of true justification through imputation of the righteousness of God
by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ that should serve as the foundational
basis for dedication and discipline living before Him.

Thus the term "evangelical personal
righteousness" is flawed nomenclature, even when it is used to denote the
practice of manifesting godly principles in response to our justified position,
which has been acquired for us! If one use it as a basis of self-aggrandizing
worth or value rating that is offered as contribution to the process of
justification, he is grossly in error, for it is not the nature of any
justification affirmed in the scriptures. All judgments or assessments of the
believerís worth must be directly linked to the merit of the propitiation
(acceptable Sacrifice), which is the only plausible substratum for
justification or any declaration of righteousness.